In this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, who is a power of attorney holder of the 2nd defendant in a suit for recovery of money filed by the first respondent bank, challenges Ext.P1 order by which the learned Subordinate Judge dismissed an application filed by him for leave to represent his principal in the suit. An interlocutory application was filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Rule 22 of the Civil Rules of Practice producing power of attorney dated 18.1.2003 executed by the 2nd defendant in the suit in his favour and Ext.P1 is the order on that application.

2. A counter affidavit was filed to the application by the respondent bank wherein the objections were to the effect that the power of attorney is not attested by witnesses and that the same has not been duly authenticated by the notary. The objections found favour with the learned Subordinate Judge who took the view that there is no proper authentication of the power of attorney and that there is no proper endorsement by the notary public to the effect that signature of the principal has been subscribed to in the notary's presence.